Dan O Posted June 11, 2001 Share Posted June 11, 2001 How many feel that an arpegiator on a keyboard is simular to having arrangements that respond to chord changes ? Is there an advantage with oone over another ? I think so ......Dan O www.esnips.com/web/SongsfromDanO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bryce Posted June 11, 2001 Share Posted June 11, 2001 I'd have to say that I find that the arpeggiator is a lot more fun and creative, because you're so much more in control of what's going on. On the arranger, you're triggering someone else's idea of a "style" or "groove". Nowhere near as much fun. You're just picking a style, and then telling it what key to play in. With the arpeggiator, you control the voicing, direction, range, gate time, and a few more ultra-deluxe parameters (time sig, syncopation, etc) depending on the individual arpeggiator. I'm very interested to hear arguments in favor of autoplay mode... http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif dB ==> David Bryce Music • Funky Young Monks <== Professional Affiliations: Royer Labs • Music Player Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlopHappy Posted June 11, 2001 Share Posted June 11, 2001 I very much agree with you db. In using the Karma in sequencing, the first thing I've done is turn the GE's off on all programs and combinations. I'll decide what my music is going to be. I might use the GE's that are generating controller data and such, but I've just can't see using Korg's music and calling it mine. I just can't swallow that. It's great to jam with though, and it's a great learning tool. When the software comes out and I can really generate my own GE's, maybe then it will become more. Until then, it's fun. As usual, I've probably pissed off most of the karma fans out there, but hey you asked right? I can't exactly give anyone's opinion but my own. Well I could, but what would be the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted June 11, 2001 Share Posted June 11, 2001 As far as I'm concerned, all of these tools are fine in principal. But personally, I don't care for anything that selects the notes for me. I don't use loops, either. I have no ethical objection to them; I just know what I want to hear, and it doesn't exist until I create it. I don't know about the Karma, but the Triton arpeggiator is REALLY FUN to play around with. When I want arpeggiator effects, I usually program the note passages directly in the sequencer. It's much easier to control them that way. I can program velocity for each note to make it groove better, implement chord changes easily, cut and paste, push timing in case of lags, and it's one fewer sync hassle that I have to negotiate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted June 11, 2001 Share Posted June 11, 2001 For giving my music and electronic flavor, I preffer to use analog-style sequencers (those 16 steps ones) and modify the filters back and forth. For me, that is having control over it. YEAH, I wish I had a KARMA and other cool things, but I have to survive with what I currently have... and that's the way I work. BTW: Both things are quite different... I could not even compare them... GusTraX Músico, Productor, Ingeniero, Tecnólogo Senior Product Manager, América Latina y Caribe - PreSonus at Fender Musical Instruments Company Instagram: guslozada Facebook: Lozada - Música y Tecnología www.guslozada.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.